This case raises a question of first impression: whether the recently enacted amendment to the expungement statute, N.J.S.A. 2C:52-5.3, includes violations of local ordinances, which were amended from Title 2C violations. Petitioners, C.C. and R.O.-S. argued that the “clean slate” statute was designed to remove an individual’s entire criminal history and therefore, must include local ordinances that arise from criminal offenses. The State proposed a strict interpretation of the statute, arguing that only convictions from indictable offenses, disorderly persons offenses, and petty disorderly persons offenses are included. This Court concluded that a liberal interpretation of the statute is consistent with the legislative intent. Local ordinances that arise from criminal offenses are unique in that they are accompanied by police and arrest reports, fingerprint cards, “mug shots,” complaint warrants or summonses and most importantly, they are included on an individual’s criminal case history or “RAP” sheet. Absent an expungement of the local ordinance that resulted from the Title 2C offense, Petitioners would be left with a criminal history. Since this is inconsistent with the intent of the “clean slate” statute, the court finds that Petitioner’s convictions are eligible for expungement pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:52-5.3.